Doom9's Forum - View Single Post

bb · 13th April 2005, 19:17

I wouldn't use lossless compression just to preserve quality. Simply leave it DV encoded; DV is known to be stable across ~5 generations of recompression. You won't notice the difference, if you ask me - there's more loss during the MPEG-2 encoding.

Editing is done using DV in modern video editors, including Adobe Premiere. You should switch on the "smart rendering" option, which restricts reencoding for the edited parts, i.e. the parts of the video where you applied filters, transitions, etc. Unedited parts simply get copied without any loss - even without a DV-RGB colorspace conversion.

@neuron2: DV source is not bad

bb

13th April 2005, 19:17	#6 \| Link
bb Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Germany Posts: 2,665	I wouldn't use lossless compression just to preserve quality. Simply leave it DV encoded; DV is known to be stable across ~5 generations of recompression. You won't notice the difference, if you ask me - there's more loss during the MPEG-2 encoding. Editing is done using DV in modern video editors, including Adobe Premiere. You should switch on the "smart rendering" option, which restricts reencoding for the edited parts, i.e. the parts of the video where you applied filters, transitions, etc. Unedited parts simply get copied without any loss - even without a DV-RGB colorspace conversion. @neuron2: DV source is not bad bb